<< Back to main new page
ZAHRA V MUSCAT
Sports law specialist Paul Horvath, of Melbourne law firm Sports Lawyer, has been a member of the Football Federation Victoria disciplinary tribunal and appeals boards. We asked him about how the law in Australia deals with the issue of ugly on-field incidents that have the potential to become nasty courtroom stoushes.
Would it be possible under Australian law for a player to be charged with something like assault or grievous bodily harm and taken to criminal court?
Yes, and the precedent for that in the AFL involved Leigh Matthews, who was charged in 1985 with assaulting Neville Bruns of Geelong. The charge was initially taken to the Magistrates’ Court and Matthews then appealed his conviction to the County Court and had that reduced to a good behaviour bond.
What were the circumstances in that case that led to him being charged? Why did that case go beyond just a tribunal hearing?
I think the key in that case was that it was something that occurred behind play. If it’s something that is pretty close to or actually in the course of play, it almost rules it out of potential criminal charges as it is too hard to prove that the person was intent on causing an injury or an assault, as opposed to affecting a tackle, albeit in a poor or sloppy or crude manner.
It is one thing to have an aggressive tackle and another thing for it to constitute an assault. It has got to be very, very clear, for it to be a tackle that has an assault element to it.
The clearest example I think might be if someone executes a sliding tackle and then deliberately strikes his opponent after the completed tackle. That would seem a separate aspect of the tackle where I would’ve thought it might be easier to show intent.
Does the level of the league have any bearing on whether an incident might be brought to the attention of the courts?
Yes and no. I think the standard of play comes into it because you might expect more crude tackles where people are less skilled. Players who aren’t fast or hold onto their opponent or the like, might be cruder about their actions, whereas more skilled players are likelier to use their skill to affect the tackle or whatever the game-based manoeuvre is.
On the other hand, ex-Central Coast goalkeeper Danny Vukovic during the A-League’s 2008 grand final was suspended for approximately nine months for manhandling a referee. The fact it was the A‑League was important in some ways because so many people watch it and they’re role models to so many kids and it sets the tone and standard and example. There’s an element of that, I think, to it.
Could there have been a case made to bring a criminal charge against Kevin Muscat for his tackle of Adrian Zahra in January?
No, I don’t think so. And having been at the match I initially thought it was a crude tackle and warranted the sending off at the time but certainly no, I didn’t give it a thought to it being a criminal matter.
But certainly as to whether or not it could go to civil court, that’s a different question. For example, and I know that this has happened with players in the English Premier League who have sustained broken legs, that could be a possibility. It’s a much lower standard of proof for civil cases. You’ve got to prove a criminal case beyond reasonable doubt. In a civil case you’ve got to prove on the balance of probabilities.
Soccer International. Vol. 19. No. 3. |
